Need opinions, M9, M 242, Mp or M262

Godfrey said:
If you're doing the trade-up with Leica, you're getting brand new, full warranty products. That's how I acquired my M-P 240: they gave me a better return on the M9 than I could get selling it, and I had a brand new camera in the end.

Leica prices are what they are. Don't like 'em? Don't buy one. :cool:

G
Click to expand...

Then it seems much better to do the trade, and not go through waiting for the M9 to be repaired; after which you have to wait to find the right M262 or 240, which will still not be as desirable as a brand new one with warranty.
 
The M262 is great and also happens to weigh the same as an M9. Considering that you may be able to find a very clean used one with a shop warranty for about $3500, whether Leica’s trade-in offer is an attractive value proposition depends on how you value your M9 and how important it is to get a new-with-warranty M262 versus probably a lightly-used one someone traded toward an M10. I would value your M9 at $1500, so the very clean used M262 would be $2000 additional and the new-with-warranty trade-in would be $3100 additional. If the warranty and less legwork is worth $1100 to you, then the trade-in makes sense.

If it were me, I would try to get maximum value from the M9 and get a good deal on a used M262.
 
Thanks for all the responses. Still haven't decided. If the M9 did not have the design flaw of the sensor I would of some point upgraded to the M10 ( I was seriously considering it when the M10 was announced). Now I doubt I will ever buy another digital M body.

The M typ 262 seems to have an equal number of pluses and minuses over the M9. Except for the 24 mp sensor and higher ISO of 6400 I just can't bring myself to spend another $2175 for the M typ 262(my early math was a faulty).

I leaning heavily to have it fixed, use it for a year while under warranty, and then decide if I change my mind about buying another digital M body.

Meanwhile feel free to keep the opinions coming.
 
This is an interesting thread for me. The M9 I purchased 2 years ago with under 1800 clicks so far shows no signs of corrosion. It is a later model made in the last year or so of production. Based on the software in the camera it is definitely the original sensor. I think I will keep it even if I have to spend the $$ for a new sensor one day.
Along with my M8 I find both cameras a delight to use.
 
M 262 is $3100 trade in. The M9 repair is $925. So to "upgrade" to the M 262 would cost $2175 more than repairing the M9. Same logic the M would be $2575 more out of pocket than just repairing the M9.

So i ask myself is the M 262 features worth an additional $2175 over the cost of repairing the M9.
 
I think if you are happy with the M9 and how it operates, and will get a decent warranty on the new sensor, it makes sense to get the repair done and keep enjoying the M9. I had an M9 and now have an M262. I can’t think of a way the M262 trails the M9. The M9 was delightful in good light and, of course, quickly hopeless in situations requiring a buffer. The M9 was about 90% there, in my view, and would not have worked for me as an only camera. The M262 is more like 98%, a fully-realized digital M. If the ISO and buffer limitations of the M9 don’t bother you, I don’t see much reason for upgrading.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Personally I'd go for a rebuilt M9. Not only the cheapest option, but without the added complication of the M, and still with proper "diffuser window" illumination for the frame lines. And manual frame-line selection: very seldom needed, but extremely welcome when it is. See also https://www.americanphotomag.com/gear-review-leica-m for a discussion of "improvements".

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

You mean there's no manual frame line selection on the M262? Well, there goes that idea. M240 the same way?
 
Hmmm, the M9 brochure says:- "The digital components are also carefully selected to ensure utter reliability over countless years of practical use. Matchless manufacturing precision and painstaking assembly guarantee functional reliability for decades to come."

That was on page 21 of the booklet. The words "countless years" and "decades to come" suggest that, perhaps, spending $925 on a lawyer might be a better option?


EDIT: I have corrected "page 12" to "page 21" above.


Regards, David
 
I'm looking at some old M9 pictures right now. They were taken in early 2010, fairly soon after my M9 came into the fold, and they are superb. There is a character and charm to the M9 images that I haven't seen with any other camera. M240 images are close. Some M10 images are closer (and have better high ISO performance). But if you like M9 images, stick with the M9. By the time the M9 gives up the ghost, the M10 should be readily available secondhand for much less than retail.
 
The M9 is a game of chance. No guarantee you won't be shelling out another $925 in the (near) future.

Personally I'd offload them asap. I own a Typ 262 now - no known issues.
 
Archlich said:
The M9 is a game of chance. No guarantee you won't be shelling out another $925 in the (near) future.

Personally I'd offload them asap. I own a Typ 262 now - no known issues.
Click to expand...

But I don't believe there have been any other issues than the sensor; and there is reason to believe that problem is now corrected. No reason to think the sky is falling. Why panic?
 
And the MP240 has the frame line selector lever, no red dot, sapphire glass on the LED, and a buffer twice the size of the straight 240.
 
Archlich said:
The M9 is a game of chance. No guarantee you won't be shelling out another $925 in the (near) future.
Click to expand...

This seems to be a common misconception in this thread, Leica are now fitting the M9 series with the MkII sensor with a cover glass different to the corroding MkI. There have been no reports at all of the MkII sensor showing corrosion issues that I have seen, the early replacements of corrosion were with a MkI sensor which could of course corrode just like the camera's original which is widely reported.

The Leica programme for replacing corroded sensors with the same (MkI) sensor was announced in November 2014. (They had of course been doing this before that date for individual customers, some being charged others under warranty, when the extent of the problem became clear the programme was announced)
The MkII sensor was announced in June 2015 and around October that year they began fitting them.
The free replacement programme ended on August 15th 2017, with some warranty exceptions)

http://en.leica-camera.com/World-of...ica-M9-M9-P-M-Monochrom-and-M-E-camera-models
 
David Hughes said:
Hmmm, the M9 brochure says:- "The digital components are also carefully selected to ensure utter reliability over countless years of practical use. Matchless manufacturing precision and painstaking assembly guarantee functional reliability for decades to come."

That was on page 12 of the booklet. The words "countless years" and "decades to come" suggest that, perhaps, spending $925 on a lawyer might be a better option?

Regards, David
Click to expand...

It's why I bought my M-E new. For that price I thought I was getting the highest quality camera, that would have utter reliability and last decades.
Leica using the word 'guarantee' here really is something isn't it?

Never again.
 
Rob-F said:
You mean there's no manual frame line selection on the M262? Well, there goes that idea. M240 the same way?
Click to expand...

M-P typ 240 has the frame line selector, not the M typ 240 or 262.

Personally, I prefer the illuminator being LED and light adaptive as in all the typ 240, 246, and 262 bodies ... I can see the frame lines at the right illumination level in a broader range of ambient lighting than with the diffuser based illuminators.

I never use/never miss the manual frame line selector on any of my metered Leica M bodies. The only time I've ever used it is when I'm using the Leicameter MR-4 on my M4-2, because the metering area corresponds to what the 90mm framelines show.

A significant difference between the M9 and the 240/262 cameras that I noticed is that the later bodies' viewfinders seem easier to see the focusing patch with. I can nail the focus more accurately and more quickly with either the M-P or the M-D than I could with the M9; with the M9, I really needed the magnifying optic for the fast 50mm and longer lenses. (The M10 is even better in this regard.)

G
 
David Hughes said:
Hmmm, the M9 brochure says:- "The digital components are also carefully selected to ensure utter reliability over countless years of practical use. Matchless manufacturing precision and painstaking assembly guarantee functional reliability for decades to come."

That was on page 12 of the booklet. The words "countless years" and "decades to come" suggest that, perhaps, spending $925 on a lawyer might be a better option?

Regards, David
Click to expand...

If you want to believe in and take as dogma all marketing hype, you'll be complaining about every product on the market.

I have absolutely no complaints about the Leica M-D typ 262. It is exactly, precisely, what I always wanted in a Leica M camera. I never even read the advertising for it. :D

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom